1984 in todays context

One of the books I have read more times than I probably should have is 1984 by George Orwell. Orwell was deeply concerned about the dangers of authoritarian government, and that concern runs through much of his writings. An earlier novel, Animal Farm, explores the same theme through political allegory. The animals overthrow their owner, Mr Jones, and establish a society based on equality. Their vision is that every animal should be treated with dignity and that none should be exploited for labour or slaughter. At first, the new society is full of hope. However, the animals lack the knowledge and experience needed to manage the farm effectively. Over time, the pigs assume leadership, claiming they are best suited to make decisions. Through propaganda, slogans, and the gradual rewriting of history, they consolidate power while convincing the other animals that every sacrifice is for the common good. By the novel's conclusion, the revolution has come full circle. The pigs have become indistinguishable from the human rulers they overthrew. Orwell captures this transformation in one of the most memorable closing lines in literature: "The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible."

1984 is a much darker and more serious novel. Orwell imagines a world divided into three superstates—Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia—locked in a state of perpetual war. Whether these wars are real or exaggerated is almost irrelevant; their primary purpose is to keep the population in a constant state of fear and mobilisation. Citizens become so preoccupied with the external enemy that they have little time or energy to question those in power. A permanent state of external conflict discourages internal rebellion. It unites society against a common enemy, allowing the ruling elite to maintain control while directing public fear and anger outwards. This is the logic behind one of Orwell's most famous paradoxes: "War is peace." In Orwell's world, endless war produces domestic stability because it suppresses dissent and justifies authoritarian rule. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, many believed that the West had entered a prolonged period of peace. Several Western countries reduced military spending, and public debate increasingly shifted towards issues such as identity politics, gender pronouns, free speech, and social justice rather than national security. The terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 fundamentally changed those priorities. In the United States, security once again became a dominant concern. The government created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2002, while the USA PATRIOT Act significantly expanded the powers of law enforcement and intelligence agencies to conduct surveillance, obtain records, and investigate suspected terrorists. These measures remain controversial. Supporters argue that they were necessary to prevent further terrorist attacks, while critics contend that they came at the expense of civil liberties and privacy. The events of 9/11 have also generated numerous conspiracy theories, including claims that the attacks were an "inside job". However, multiple official investigations, including the findings of the 9/11 Commission, found no evidence to support those claims. But the declaration of war on terror means that the US will be in a perpetual state of war that may not be solved. But looking back, it ensured that the government had more power and the people fewer civil liberties - "War is peace".

Perhaps the most important concept Orwell introduces in 1984 is doublethink—the ability to hold two contradictory beliefs at the same time and accept both as true. It is the psychological foundation of totalitarian rule. Citizens are trained not merely to obey the Party but to believe whatever the Party declares, even when it directly contradicts observable reality or what they previously accepted as fact. The novel's protagonist, Winston Smith, works in the Ministry of Truth. Ironically, his job is not to preserve history but to rewrite it. Newspapers, speeches, and official records are constantly altered to ensure that the Party is never shown to have been wrong. Once the original documents are destroyed, there is no official evidence that the Party ever changed its position. Orwell illustrates this with one of the novel's most striking passages: "The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia." Although the war is constantly changing and the sides also, today it will be Oceania fighting Eurasia; tomorrow it will be at war with Eastasia. The contradiction is accepted without question because all documentary evidence has been rewritten. The only remaining evidence exists in people's memories, and these too are gradually reshaped through propaganda, fear, and doublethink. 

Another of Orwell's enduring ideas is "Newspeak", a language deliberately designed to reduce the range of human thought. By eliminating words and simplifying vocabulary, the Party seeks to eliminate the concepts those words express. If people lack the language to describe freedom, justice, or rebellion, it becomes increasingly difficult for them even to conceive of such ideas. As Orwell suggests, limiting language ultimately limits thought. The Party therefore seeks a monopoly not only over political power but also over language, information, and history. Whoever controls the past can shape the present, and whoever controls information can define what people accept as truth. Hence the phrase in the book,  "Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." 

In 1984, society is monitored by the "Thought Police", whose role is to detect and punish "thoughtcrime"—any independent thought that challenges the Party's orthodoxy. One example is believing that two plus two equals four when the Party insists it equals five. In Orwell's dystopia, truth is no longer an objective reality but whatever the Party declares it to be. Under torture, Winston Smith eventually abandons his belief in objective truth, concluding: "Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once." Orwell's warning is not about mathematics but about the power of authoritarian systems to manipulate reality itself.

The totalitarian dictator of Oceania is known as "Big Brother"; Orwell never reveals whether he is a real person. But there are posters of his face all over the place with the caption "Big Brother is Watching You". Hence, he creates the impression of always watching and being omnipresent. Like monitoring cameras with motion sensors that can watch people everywhere all the time.

Today, the danger is different but still significant. Digital content creators, bloggers, influencers, and even AI-powered platforms can reduce complex historical events into short videos, slogans, and emotionally appealing narratives. As a result, the causes of the First World War, the Second World War, the Vietnam War, and other major conflicts are sometimes presented as simplistic stories of one nation merely disliking another, ignoring the political, economic, ideological, and strategic factors that historians continue to debate. The decision to use nuclear weapons against Japan illustrates how historical interpretation can become polarised. Some historians argue that the bombings were primarily intended to force Japan's surrender and avoid a costly invasion that was expected to cause enormous military and civilian casualties. Others contend that demonstrating American military power to the Soviet Union also influenced the decision. These explanations are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and historians continue to debate the relative importance of each factor. Claims that Japan was already on the verge of surrender are likewise contested. Although Japan's military position had become desperate by August 1945, significant elements within its leadership still favoured continuing the war or seeking better surrender terms. Even after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Japanese government remained divided. It ultimately required the unprecedented intervention of Emperor Hirohito, who addressed the nation by radio for the first time, to announce Japan's acceptance of surrender. This episode demonstrates how historical events are often far more complex than the simplified accounts commonly found in modern media. But people just boil it down to the US wanting to demonstrate nuclear power to the Russians.

The digital age has given Orwell's ideas a new relevance. In 1984, Winston Smith and countless other officials manually rewrote newspapers, books, and historical records. It was a slow and labour-intensive process. Today, with most information stored digitally, the same task could, in principle, be carried out far more quickly. Searchable databases, cloud storage, and AI systems make it possible to locate, edit, replace, or remove vast amounts of information in a fraction of the time it would have taken Winston. This does not mean that governments or technology companies can simply erase every trace of history at the flip of a switch. Digital information is often duplicated, archived, backed up, and mirrored across multiple systems, making complete erasure difficult. However, digital platforms do make it much easier to alter what most people see first. Search rankings, recommendation algorithms, content moderation, and AI-generated summaries can all influence which version of events is most visible and which is effectively buried. Orwell's warning therefore feels remarkably modern. The challenge today is not only whether information can be deleted, but also whether it can be overwhelmed, rewritten, or reframed so effectively that the original version becomes difficult for most people to find. If those who control information also control the tools people use to access it, they gain unprecedented influence over public understanding of the past and, consequently, over the present.